The pigmask-off Atlantic pigmask-off failing to beat the allegations, folks

  • LeninWeave [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Imagine talking about journalistic integrity when you work for that genocidal Zionist rag. Her and her coworkers practically arranged the murder of the Palestinian journalist Anas al-Sharif and his coworkers by isntrael .

    You work at a “journalism” outlet run by a man who volunteered to go be a war criminal at a torture camp for the victims of an illegal occupation, shut the fuck up forever, walk out of The Atlantic, and maybe also walk into The Atlantic.

  • NuraShiny [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I am sorry but she is doing the right thing! Posting harder about not being owned totally makes you less owned! corn-man-khrush

  • Philote@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    She is not validating Kirk. Her arguments are for journalistic integrity. It’s a challenging moment to take that stance when everyone’s so divided, but she is holding her ground and I respect that. The New York Times and other outlets resorting to viral meme quotes, that are not vetted or truthful, is not good journalism. It’s just stoking the fire for clicks. So I agree with what her take is.

    • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      The basic element of propaganda is not lying, it is focus.

      When they’re focusing on the good points of a horrible bloated monster of a human being, you should recognise someone who is manipulating you. The problem is that you hold “journalism” so highly that you’ve made yourself into a gullible rube.

    • fox [comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      4 days ago

      Her take is “he never said that” wrt saying gay people should be stoned or that children should watch public executions and she’s right, what he said was “Gay people being stoned to death is God’s perfect law”, to an audience of Christian nationalists. And he didn’t say children should watch executions, he agreed with someone else saying it. Paraphrasing opinions is indeed exactly the same as outright lying about them, and you’re very smart for noticing that.

      He never said he would refuse to board a plane a black pilot was flying, he merely said “If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified”.

    • EnsignRedshirt [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      4 days ago

      Her point is basically that people are using the wrong quotes to report on Kirk’s political views, and while that is an issue of journalistic integrity, it’s not particularly relevant here. What would be the difference if she got her way? That we learn that Charlie Kirk was, in fact, a Nazi, just not in the exact way that he’s being portrayed now?

      Cherry-picking quotes and presenting them out of context is a serious problem when it’s used to misrepresent a person or issue. In this case, any misrepresentation is practically negligible. Charlie Kirk was a proud fascist, and no one reading these articles about him is going to get a different view of him by being more “fair” towards him.

      It’s not that she’s wrong, it’s that this is a dumb hill to die on. She should be making this argument when media outlets are using these tactics to actively obscure or manipulate the truth, as they do all the time, and not when they’re just being lazy but otherwise getting the point across. She’s actively helping the fascists right now by clogging up the field with her pedantic bullshit. That’s part of how propaganda works, and if you can’t see that then it’s working.

      • emdash [comrade/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 days ago

        This focus on not “misrepresenting” people is always directional, too. It is only ever aimed toward right-wing figures. They will distort the words of leftists to try to demonize them, but right-wing figures can literally do a Nazi salute on live television and people will give them the benefit of the doubt.

        • fox [comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          Point in case, Elon is currently on a khole bender claiming the Nazis were leftists because they have socialist in the name. If that’s the case Elon why did you do Nazi salutes on stage to a bunch of Republicans?